Are voter ID laws too onerous? B.C. court readies to hear arguments

Voters lineup at a federal election polling station at St. Mary’s Hall in the riding of Calgary Centre in southwest Calgary, Alberta Monday May 2, 2011.Stuart Gradon
/ Calgary Herald

A B.C. court will be asked this to decide whether changes to Canada’s voter identification rules deprive certain populations of the right to vote. Here, voters leave a provincial election polling station at Fisher Park Public School in Ottawa, Oct. 6, 2011.Jean Levac
/ Ottawa Citizen

A B.C. court will be asked this to decide whether changes to Canada’s voter identification rules deprive certain populations of the right to vote. Here, voters leave a polling station at the Humbervale Christian Outreach in Etobicoke, Ont. Monday May 2, 2011 after casting their ballot in Canada’s federal election.Tim Fraser
/ Tim Fraser

A voter enters a Toronto polling station to cast his ballot in the federal election, Monday evening, May 2, 2011.Aaron Lynett
/ (Aaron Lynett / National Post)

Related

A B.C. court will be asked this coming week to decide whether the right to vote trumps all concerns about voter fraud, or whether protecting the system means turning some people away from the polls.

The applicants in the case hope to have the appeals court overturn a lower court decision and revoke certain provisions of the federal government’s five-year-old voter identification laws. That end is far from a certainty and even if the three advocates from B.C. win, it isn’t clear if they will force a change in policy.

The government has taken note of the case that resurfaced in 2012 following a two-year hiatus during which the three applicants had to find themselves a new legal team. A summary of the case was contained in a briefing note to Democratic Reform Minister Tim Uppal with departmental officials adding they would keep Uppal apprised of further developments.

When the case is finally heard this week, the onus will be on the three applicants from British Columbia — Rose Henry, Clyde Wright and Helen Eddlestone — to prove that the trial judge erred in his evaluation of the evidence. The three unsuccessfully argued in 2010 that Bill C-31, passed in 2007, places barriers between some Canadians and their constitutional right to vote.

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association is also asking the court to side with the three applicants.

“For a select group of vulnerable people in society, the voter ID laws actually can and do … serve to deprive them of the right to vote,” said lawyer Brent Olthuis, who represents Henry, Wright and Eddlestone.

“All we’re seeking to do is to undo amendments that were made,” he said in an interview with Postmedia News. “It’s not a radical result, in my viewpoint, that we’re seeking. It’s simply to undo fetters that were placed … on the right to vote.”

According to the applicants, those “fetters” were put in place in 2007 when Parliament enacted new election rules that included requiring voters to provide either government or photo identification at the polls, or swear an oath to polling station staff in the absence of approved identification, provided a registered voter at the polling station vouched for them. Before that, all people needed to vote was to walk into a polling station, state their name and address and they were allowed to cast a ballot.

The new voting rules came into effect in time for the 2008 election.

At the time the bill was before Parliament, the government argued the new rules presented a balanced approach to allowing Canadians to vote while preventing voter fraud and the government argued the rules continue to make voting easy for any Canadian.

“In fact, given the flexibility that has been built in to the wide array of identification documents allowed by the (chief electoral officer), it is easier to vote than to rent a movie,” government lawyers argue in their submission to the court.

The appellants’ response, filed on Jan. 4, argues, “Even assuming that assertion to be true, it is of no relevance.”

“With respect,” the response says, “a denial of the right to vote even on one occasion is not a trifling matter. It is a most serious issue and involves a breach of (constitutional rights).”

Eddlestone is 86 and visually impaired. In 2008, she wasn’t allowed to vote because the only identification she brought with her to the polls was a CNIB photo ID card, which wasn’t on the list of accepted documents. Eddlestone had documentation at home, but found the round trip to her home and back to the polling station too much of an effort for her and opted not to vote.

Her fellow applicants, Henry and Wright, were both able to vote in 2008. Both argued they haven’t always had proper identification, Wright because he has frequently been homeless, and feared not being able to vote in the future.

The trial judge held that the voter identification laws did increase the burden on citizens, particularly “economically disadvantaged and homeless citizens,” that could prohibit some people from voting in future elections. But the judge said that outcome was a reasonable limit on the right to vote if it meant preventing voter fraud and reinforcing trust in the electoral system.

— With files from Doug Quan, Postmedia News

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.

Almost Done!

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.